You'd think a carefully hand-picked prosecutor, targeted at a former President of the United States, would be a meticulous and precise legal mind so as to bring an airtight case against his target, with little but political objection.
But that's not Joe Biden's special counsel prosecutor, Jack Smith, who's racking up ethics violations like a dirty big city cop, and that's just in the first weeks of his indictment.
According to Breitbart's Joel Pollak:
Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz says that under his own “fraud” standard, Special Counsel Jack Smith could be indicted for omitting a key portion of then-President Donald Trump’s speech in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021.
The indictment charges Trump with four counts, including “conspiracy to defraud the United States.” But in a portion recounting Trump’s speech at the “Stop the Steal” rally, Smith repeats the errors made by House Democrats in Trump’s second impeachment trial: he focuses on Trump’s use of the phrase “fight like hell,” and omits a sentence highlighted by Trump’s defense team: “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Dershowitz told the Megyn Kelly Show podcast on Friday that by his own standard, Smith could be charged with fraud, because of his omission of Trump’s “peaceful” rhetoric.
“Under the indictment itself, Jack Smith could be himself indicted. He told a direct lie in this indictment. He purported to describe the speech that President Trump made on January 6th. And he left out the key words, when President Trump said, ‘I want you to demonstrate peacefully and patriotically. You know, a lie by omission, under the law, can be as serious as a lie by commission.”
So he went the Adam Schiff route, leaving off the part about President Trump urging his followers on January 6 to be peaceful, presenting his evidence against Trump by preenting the opposite of what he said. Just leaving it off like it never happened, obviously to sway a jury his way, and too bad about the defendant.
He also did this, according to Matt Margolis at PJMedia:
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team has acknowledged they incorrectly claimed that they had submitted all the necessary evidence as mandated by the law in the classified documents case against Donald Trump.
That’s basically a euphemism for getting caught committing prosecutorial misconduct.
Prosecutors “discovered” that a crucial video intended to be presented as evidence had not been appropriately processed and uploaded to the designated platform for the defense to review during the investigation.
This discovery occurred just as they prepared to indict Carlos De Oliveira, the Mar-a-Lago property manager, for his alleged involvement in a conspiracy with Trump to delete surveillance footage from the estate. Trump denies the allegations and says the videos were “handed over to the thugs.”
“The Government’s representation at the July 18 hearing that all surveillance footage the Government had obtained pre-indictment had been produced was therefore incorrect,” Smith’s team admitted in its recent filing.
According to Just The News, “All CCTV footage obtained by the government has now been given to the defendants, according to Smith’s team. The so-called Brady rule requires prosecutors to disclose all evidence and information favorable to the defendant.”
So in other words, he withheld evidence from the other side which might have been favorable to their defense. The 1963 Brady motion says that as a basic matter of fairness, they can't do that, but Smith did it anyway.
This sounds like quite a pattern of corner-cutting from Smith and his office, characteristic of dirty cops in big cities who will cook up anything for a conviction.
Smith's career has been replete with this kind of unethical behavior, as Margolis noted in his piece, from a case against a congressman which involved witness tampering and wiretapping, to his past case against a Virginia governor, which wat thrown out by the Supreme Court.
Obviously, he's all about pulling fast ones on his latest target, President Trump. This tells us a lot about what this legal process is going to be like: Rules for thee, but not for me.
Why he thinks he can get away with this kind of behavior, and still secure a conviction suggests that he thinks the ground is protecting him and he can rig with abandon because the fix is in.
Image: Screen shot from CBS News video, via YouTube