Jack Smith’s indictment against Trump is highly problematic.
Jack Smith’s Indictment: A Political Circus
Jack Smith, the special counsel, was supposed to be a beacon of justice. He promised to uncover the truth, present the evidence, and hold accountable those who committed actual crimes. But on Tuesday, his announcement of criminal charges against President Trump fell short of even the most basic scrutiny.
Instead of charging Trump with incitement to riot or insurrection, Smith presented a lengthy op-ed on why Trump was a “Bad Orange Man” during the period between November 3, 2020, and January 6, 2021. He charged Trump with a series of ancillary or non-applicable crimes, lacking the evidence for the more serious charges.
This approach sets up three dangerous landmines for the country:
- The expansion of law enforcement power into traditionally protected areas of free speech.
- The politicization of the Justice Department, further polarizing the nation.
- The potential politicization of the Supreme Court as these stretch charges make their way through the judicial system.
The Legal Speciousness of Jack Smith’s Charges
The indictment acknowledges Trump’s right to free speech and his ability to challenge the election legally. However, Smith claims that Trump’s actions went beyond exercising those rights and crossed into criminal territory.
“The Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome determinative fraud during the election and that he had won. He was also entitled to formally challenge the results of the election through lawful and appropriate means… Shortly after election day, the Defendant also pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election process.”
But how exactly did Trump’s activities violate the law while evading the protection of the First Amendment? Smith alleges violations of three criminal statutes: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct the January 6 congressional proceeding, and conspiracy against the right to vote.
All three charges are massive stretches, novel interpretations of the law that endanger the very essence of the First Amendment.
The first charge, conspiracy to defraud the United States, is typically reserved for cases involving swindling victims out of money or tangible property. It is not meant to criminalize political rhetoric or hyperbole.
The second charge, obstruction of justice, is usually applied to witness tampering or intimidation, not to lobbying the government based on a legal theory. Charging Trump with obstruction here would set a dangerous precedent for free speech.
The third charge, conspiracy against the right to vote, was originally intended to protect marginalized communities from voter intimidation. It was never meant to stifle the expression of bad legal theories. Applying it in this context would also violate the First Amendment.
Smith’s indictment fails to meet the criteria for these crimes, and he knows it. His announcement focused more on Trump’s political activities than on any actual legal violations.
The Double Standard
Conservatives are rightly pointing out the double standard in the DOJ’s treatment of Trump’s indictment. It conveniently comes on the heels of the exposure and cancellation of the DOJ’s secret deal with Hunter Biden, overseen by Attorney General Merrick Garland, who works for Joe Biden. This deal shielded Hunter Biden from any investigation into his business corruption, which implicates Joe Biden.
The blatant double standard is being used to attack Joe Biden’s chief political opponent, piling on yet another case against Trump. The list of legal challenges involving Trump seems endless, creating a clear path from today to the 2024 election.
Trump will be consumed by legal battles throughout the election cycle, while the media endlessly covers these issues. Meanwhile, Joe Biden is likely to escape unscathed. This appears to be a case of legal election interference, as Trump claims.
This claim is likely to rally GOP voters to Trump’s side, hoping for vengeance against the Biden DOJ and the media. However, as Trump’s campaign becomes entangled in legal and financial quagmires, that hope may prove empty.
The Supreme Court Challenge
Jack Smith’s weak indictment is likely to be overturned by the Supreme Court. As the head of the DOJ’s public integrity unit, Smith has a track record of failed prosecutions, including the overturned case against Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell.
If this case ends up before the Supreme Court and is overturned by a majority vote, the resulting panic on the Left will be unprecedented. It will surpass the panic caused by the infamous Bush v. Gore case. Chief Justice John Roberts’ dream of a respected Supreme Court will crumble, and Smith will be to blame for his baseless charges.
All of this could have been avoided. Smith’s case against Trump for classified documents charges is legally sound, but he couldn’t resist the temptation to put Trump on trial for January 6. In doing so, he threatens the First Amendment, the legitimacy of the DOJ, and ultimately, the credibility of the Supreme Court. All for the sake of pursuing the ”Bad Orange Man.”
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
