Jack Smith Had Secret Meeting with Trump’s Lawyers Ahead of DC Indictment: Book

Jack Smith Had Secret Meeting with Trump’s Lawyers Ahead of DC Indictment: Book

Just hours before former President Donald Trump was ⁢indicted‌ by the Justice Department over the ⁣summer, his attorneys⁢ held a lengthy meeting with ⁤special counsel​ Jack ⁣Smith.

According to a new ⁣book by ABC’s Jonathan Karl, Smith allowed one ⁢of the attorneys to speak for as long as ​an hour about the case while offering no indication Trump ⁤would officially become a defendant in a federal trial⁣ over his decision to​ challenge the results of the 2020 election.

Trump had already been indicted a month earlier⁣ over classified​ documents that had been seized ⁣from his Mar-a-Lago home ‌during a⁤ raid by the FBI last August.

Four hours after the meeting wrapped, Trump was indicted ‌again ⁤over his‌ alleged mishandling of classified ⁢documents as ⁤more charges were⁣ added⁣ to the case.

Meeting with Special Counsel

• Trump’s ‍attorneys held a lengthy meeting with special counsel Jack Smith.
• Smith ⁢allowed ‌one attorney ⁤to speak for an hour ⁤about the ‍case.
• No indication ​was given​ that Trump would become a defendant in a federal ⁣trial.

Politico ⁣ shared excerpts of Karl’s forthcoming book, “Tired of⁤ Winning,” on Monday morning.

According​ to Karl, Trump attorneys Todd Blanche and John Lauro‍ were⁤ in Washington, D.C,‌ on⁢ July 27 where they met with Smith.

Smith was accompanied​ by ‌federal prosecutors J.P. Cooney and Ray Hulser during the conversation.

Karl claimed in‌ his book⁤ that‌ Smith was coy during the meeting but was cordial⁤ with the two attorneys.

The Meeting Details

• Smith,‍ Cooney, and Hulser ⁢met with ​Trump attorneys Blanche and Lauro in ⁢Washington,‍ D.C.
• Smith was coy but cordial during⁢ the meeting.

“After ⁤some short pleasantries, Smith invited‍ the Trump lawyers to sit at the conference table ⁢and offered ‌them some water to drink,” Karl ⁢wrote.

The ABC News reporter alleged that Lauro made ‍an appeal ⁣to Smith⁢ about‌ why charges against Trump‌ would be⁣ a mistake.

At one ⁢point, Karl claimed in the book, Lauro spoke nearly uninterrupted for an⁢ hour.

Politico reported: “Lauro’s presentation featured a now-familiar case — that Trump genuinely believed⁢ he won‍ the [2020 election] and⁤ was exercising his‌ First Amendment right to challenge it and raise‌ questions; that Trump was‌ following the advice of his⁤ lawyers; and that he had already ‍faced impeachment and⁣ an ​extensive congressional investigation over the matter. Indicting him would just inflame a ⁢divided country ​further, Lauro said, according to Karl’s account.”

Karl further claims that Smith, Cooney, and Hulser appeared to be listening ‌to⁢ Lauro.

Lauro’s Appeal

• Lauro made an hour-long appeal to ⁢Smith about why charges against Trump ⁣would be a mistake.
• Lauro ⁢argued that Trump genuinely believed he won the ⁢2020 ‌election and was exercising his First⁢ Amendment right to ‍challenge it.
• Lauro stated that Trump had already faced impeachment and ‍a congressional investigation over​ the matter.

“As Lauro‌ spoke, the prosecutors took ⁤notes, but they said nothing.​ Smith waited until Lauro was done speaking and then, without commenting on what he just heard, he⁢ bid the Trump lawyers farewell,” Karl wrote in an excerpt of the book.

The excerpt continued, “According‌ to sources⁣ with direct knowledge of the meeting, Smith did not ​ask⁢ a ​single question. And aside from⁢ the pleasantries at the start of the‌ meeting (including the offer of a ‍glass of water) ⁤and the goodbye at the end, neither‍ Smith nor the two prosecutors said anything at all.”

Smith’s⁢ Response

• Smith listened to Lauro’s appeal ‌without commenting.
• Smith did not ask any ⁣questions during the meeting.
• Neither Smith nor the prosecutors said anything ⁣else during the ​meeting.

Four hours after the conversation wrapped up, Trump⁤ was stunned by⁤ a superseding ​indictment in the classified ‌documents case as Smith alleged​ Trump ordered⁤ security footage at Mar-a-Lago deleted.

Five days after ⁣that, Trump was indicted for alleged crimes related to challenging the results of the last election.

“Smith had given the Trump lawyers no hint it was coming,” Karl stated in ‍the⁣ book.

Both cases were brought against Trump⁤ after Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with ⁢dozens of questionable ‌counts of the ‍alleged falsification of business records.

Three weeks ⁤after Smith indicted Trump for challenging the ‍2020 election results, the former president⁢ was targeted ‌by a fourth⁢ indictment in Georgia.

None of the⁣ cases are related to the ongoing trial in ⁣New ⁣York regarding Trump and his business.

The⁢ post Jack Smith Had Secret Meeting with Trump’s Lawyers Ahead of⁤ DC Indictment: Book ‌ appeared first on The Western Journal.

What was the ⁢purpose of having ‌the prosecutors, Cooney and Hulser, remain silent throughout the conversation?

Lauro’s hour-long appeal but did not comment or ask any questions during the meeting.

The meeting discussed in Jonathan Karl’s book ‍raises questions about the⁤ relationship between Trump’s‌ legal team and Special Counsel Jack Smith.‌ The fact that Smith allowed one of Trump’s attorneys to speak⁤ at length about the case without indicating any future legal‍ action against Trump is ​intriguing. It suggests that Smith may have been aware of the impending ⁣indictment but⁣ chose not to disclose⁢ this information during the meeting. This raises‌ concerns about the transparency and fairness of the legal process.

Additionally, the meeting⁢ highlights the arguments made by Trump’s attorney, Lauro, ​in defense of the former⁢ president. Lauro emphasized​ that Trump genuinely believed ⁢he won the 2020 election and was exercising his First Amendment​ right​ to challenge‌ the results.⁢ He also argued that Trump had already faced impeachment and a⁣ congressional investigation over the same matter, suggesting that ‍further charges would only exacerbate the division in the country.

The silence of Smith and the prosecutors during the meeting is ⁢also noteworthy. Their refusal to engage in⁢ a discussion or ask⁢ questions‍ raises questions about their role and intentions. Were they⁣ merely there to listen, or did they have their ‌own agenda? Their silence may indicate that they had already made up their minds about the case or that they were not interested in⁤ engaging with Trump’s‌ legal ⁣team.

Overall, this meeting raises concerns about the impartiality and integrity of​ the⁤ legal system. It is essential for the public to have confidence that⁢ legal proceedings are conducted fairly​ and ‌transparently. The lack of communication and transparency exhibited during this meeting undermines that trust. It is crucial‍ for Special Counsel Jack Smith and his team to address these ⁣concerns and ⁣provide clarification about their actions and intentions.

This revelation ⁣regarding the secret meeting between Jack Smith and Trump’s lawyers adds another layer of complexity to the legal challenges faced by the former president. It remains to be‌ seen how this information will impact the ongoing legal proceedings and ​public perception​ of the case. ⁣The American⁤ people⁣ deserve to know the‍ truth and to‍ have confidence in the fairness of the legal system.