Jack Smith’s Evidence Made Public After Judge Chutkan Rules Keeping It Private Could Be ‘Election Interference’

As the presidential election hits the homestretch, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan has released unproven allegations against former President Donald Trump from his federal election interference case.

Special prosecutor Jack Smith has alleged that Trump’s battle against the results of the 2020 election was an effort to overturn the will of the voters, while Trump has said he was battling against allegations of voter fraud that tipped the election to President Joe Biden.

Although much of the evidence gathered by Smith to use at Trump’s trial was redacted, Chutkan said she wanted to push out what she could no matter what the impact might be on the election, according to The Hill.

“If the court withheld information that the public otherwise had a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of releasing it, that withholding could itself constitute—or appear to be— election interference,” she wrote in releasing the 1,889 pages.

In one document, former Attorney General Bill Barr told Trump that his fraud claims were “crazy,” according to Newsweek. Barr has said he told Trump in November 2020 that allegations Dominion voting systems were faulty were incorrect.

“The one I specifically remember addressing was – were the Dominion machines,” Barr told the January 6 committee.

“And I made the point that it was crazy for them to be wasting their time on this because they had been easily checked because they’re tabulation machines, and all you have to do is compare the tabulation with the ballots, and I just thought it was crazy,” he said then.

Trump’s attorneys opposed the release saying it could endanger potential witnesses and “especially in light of the extraordinary media coverage of this case and the Presidential election that is less than 3 weeks away—and also irreparably harm President Trump.”

Trump’s lawyers noted that Vice President Kamala Harris, who is locked in a battle with Trump for the presidency, has been using material from a previous release in her effort to defeat Trump.

“The incumbent Vice President—whose administration the Special Counsel serves—also began featuring the Special Counsel’s brief in political advertisements for the 2024 Presidential Election. Kamala Harris, YouTube (Oct. 6, 2024),” the filing said.

On Friday, Trump said releasing allegations from the prosecution ahead of his trial was “election interference,” according to NBC.

He said the release was “a terrible thing, what’s happening. And the judges, this judge is the most evil person.”

Legal expert Jonathan Turley was more restrained but also opposed releasing the information, according to Newsweek.

Turley said that “any trial would occur in 2025…there was no reason to release this filing shortly before an election.”

“This is criticism coming from across the political spectrum,” Turley said, adding “the court made the wrong decision in releasing this…that it was unnecessary.”

Turley said “most prosecutors and judges would seek to avoid the appearance of interference. Particularly in a case like this one…where the release before the election was entirely gratuitous.”

“The one thing missing here is the need for this, and also the court itself said that this was procedurally irregular, and one would think that having come to the conclusion … the court would be cognizant of the obvious appearance to the public,” Turley said.

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.