Reading Jack Smith's response on jury instructions and it's clear that the gloves are off btw DOJ and Judge Cannon.
One defense attorney just told me: "The tone Smith is taking with Cannon is no longer persuasion but outright threats. Unheard of dynamic btw DOJ and the bench."
Jack Smith's response is hysterical (and not in a funny way in a desperate way) bc he knows he has little control over her decision related to final jury instructions.
And he is arguing the basis for Trump's "unauthorized possession" of national defense material rests on Obama exec order not the Presidential Records Act.
So everyone who cried for months that "DRUMPF BROKE THE PRA!" can sit down. Jack Smith says PRA now has nothing to do with the case.
Also reminder of the bait and switch here. NARA sought files based on the claims Trump was violating the PRA. He produced 15 boxes of papers. NARA then claimed they found records with "classified markings" and sent a criminal referral (1st time ever) to FBI.
FBI promptly opened investigation. FBI sent a subpoena to Trump in May 2022 seeking more records with "classified markings." They turned over 38 more files.
Then in August, FBI sought search warrant seeking "national defense information." Reminder too we have not seen full unredacted application for search warrant.
Did DOJ seek warrant under the PRA or the Espionage Act or Obama's Exec Order or....what?
I will separate out Smith's threats to Cannon (unusual and toothless for the most part) later but this is basically the jury instructions DOJ wants to use.
This also might be a problem for DOJ bc it appears Trump still had Q security clearance at Dept. of Energy--one that DOE retroactively rescinded after Smith indicted Trump.
Also during March 14 hearing, DOJ claimed there was no formal process for a president to either receive or lose security clearance. So this might be another area of contention
This is why Smith is so angry--he knows if Cannon proceeds with the proposed scenario presented in her jury instructions order, he is, as one defense attorney told me at the time, f*cked.
He essentially demands that she rule now on jury instructions (she doesn't have to) or dismiss the counts so he can appeal. If she doesn't, he might seek "mandamus" at appellate court--asking 11th Circuit to tell Cannon what to do in the case. Very rare.
A reminder that this is Smith's indictment.
Charged a former president for the first time on violating the Espionage Act.
Now Smith's wants the jury to interpret the language of the law based on Obama's Executive Order not the Presidential Records Act.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Sen. Rand Paul just published records showing the FBI's two-year surveillance of an American citizen suspected of entering the Capitol on Jan 6. The spying included physical surveillance of her home and movements; she, like thousands of others were placed on a TSA "terror" watch list...
Christine Crowder is a Catholic school teacher and her husband a federal air marshal. Paul released 70 pages of docs related to the FBI's full throated investigation into an innocent American.
Just imagine how many times this happened--and not just to J6ers--under Chris Wray:
Outrageously--DC US Attorney Matt Graves wanted to pursue a criminal prosecution of Crowder DESPITE the FBI finally admitting it did not have enough evidence to bring a case against Crowder.
Why Graves is still off the hook for his handling of J6 prosecution in beyond me:
🧵on his misrepresentations, falsehoods, and straight up lies told by the special counsel to House Judiciary Committee on Dec 17.
Smith had no evidence that any of the so-called "classified documents" he claimed to have found were in boxes temporarily stored in MAL ballroom or bathroom after the president left the White House.
Lie #2:
Smith was extremely aware of the 2024 election calendar--which is why he took what he himself described as the "extraordinary" step in asking the Supreme Court to bypass the DC appellate court--the next normal step-- in considering Judge Chutkan's Dec. 2023 order denying all forms of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution and take up the immunity question immediately. (SCOTUS denied his request, Chutkan's order was upheld by 3-judge panel in Feb. 2024, which was then considered by SCOTUS in April. On July 1, 2024, SCOTUS issued its decision providing for a broad swath of immunity for acts in office, resulting in a major gutting of Smith's J6 indictment.)
Lie #3: That the unarmed protest at the Capitol on Jan 6 was an "attack" incited by the president and the still unsubstantiated allegation that 140 officers were injured by protesters.
Keep in mind: Smith's J6 indictment was four counts: two related to 1512(c)(2)--a corporate fraud statute unlawfully used in J6 cases according to SCOTUS in the Fischer decision--and two other VERY vague conspiracy counts, conspiracy to defraud and conspiracy against "rights."
Hearing about to start in Jeb Boasberg courtroom as the embattled judge resumes contempt proceedings against the Trump DOJ related to Alien Enemies Act declassified.live/p/the-contempt…
Boasberg says appellate court gave him permission to "go forward" with another contempt inquiry.
Authorized to pursue a criminal contempt factual finding against the Trump DOJ, which he is "preparing" to do as he did "seven months ago." (His April 2025 probable cause finding was vacated but the appellate court kicked the matter back to him to start over.
Boasberg says there are "new developments" since his first determination and raises allegations by Erez Reuvini, the so called DOJ "whistleblower" who accused former acting DAG Emil Bove of saying the DOJ might have to say "fuck you" to the courts. Boasberg says Reuvini might be called as a witness as the judge plans to require testimony from various parties.
"I believe justice requires me to move promptly on this."
Lee Gelernt, ACLU attorney representing illegal Venezuelans covered by AEA.
DOJ prosecutor - "the government objects to criminal contempt proceedings." Boasberg immediately grills prosecutor as to whether he believes the full DC appellate court gave him permission to restart contempt inquiry.
"I will be going forward with it," Boasberg.
Boasberg says he will seek testimony from those who "defied" his order to return planes carrying AEA subjects on the evening of March 15. The problem for Boasberg is the directive represented an "oral order" that was not reflected in his later written order.
He wants proposals from both sides by Monday on how to proceed including a list of witnesses in his fact finding exercise including Reuvini and Drew Ensign, the DOJ who represented the government during early stage of litigation.
"I certainly intend to find out what happened that day."
On his radio show today, Glenn Beck appears to walk back The Blaze’s audacious outing of the alleged J5/6 pipe bomber.
He refused to mention the individual’s name on air and said “a match is not guilt, comparison is not proof.”
There’s more…
After recklessly putting this individual’s name out in the public last week and endangering her safety, Beck now insists that she must be protected and claims she was low man on the totem pole in any inside operation. Not what was being said last week when story was pitched:
“If the story is true.”
Now I’ve been told for days that no one can raise questions about the veracity of the piece or express doubt over the identification of this individual.
🤷🏼♀️
(Btw this individual works campus security for CIA. She’s not exactly a top tier official.)
Here’s the nondisclosure order signed by Jeb Boasberg in May 2023 prohibiting Verizon from notifying several US senators and one House member that Jack Smith had subpoenaed their phone records. Verizon complied with the subpoenas and NDOs with the exception of Ted Cruz.
Important to note what Boasberg claims here. In order to authorize an NDO in a tech related subpoena, a judge must determine one of five factors according to Stored Communications Act.
What Boasberg alleged is that sitting Republican lawmakers might break the law if notified of the subpoenas.
He is a lunatic and must be removed from the bench. This is the CHIEF JUDGE of the DC district court.
Dreeben played a key role not just on Team Mueller but he also is directly tied to Comey's involvement in developing the obstruction case against the president--recall Comey admitted the reason he leaked the content of his secret Flynn memo was to prompt the appointment of a special counsel, which happened the day after the NYT leak... x.com/JohnWHuber/sta…
In 2023, Dreeben bragged about his lead role in the Mueller witch hunt; the "speed" at which the investigation proceeded; and how he was responsible for overseeing the production of Vol II of Mueller report, which addressed potential obstruction charges against the president.
If I were the DOJ, this guy would be toward the top of a government witness list. So how can he represent Comey when he likely will be questioned as part of the obstruction/false statements case against him?