Jack Smith could hold J6 case as an 'insurance policy' if documents case is derailed: ex-prosecutor
Special counsel Jack Smith has yet to decide whether to issue charges in the second of the major cases he is investigating against Donald Trump, which is his role in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol and the preceding efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. But he made a major step in the case, as reports this week indicate he gave immunity for the testimony of two of the fake Trump electors who tried to overturn the counting of votes, including Gary Michael Brown, who ran Election Day operations for the former president.
Former federal prosecutor Harry Litman, speaking on MSNBC's "Deadline: White House," argued that the timing might actually work to Smith's favor, allowing him to use the January 6 case as an "insurance policy" to prosecute the former president in the event the first case, around Espionage Act offenses for his classified document stash at Mar-a-Lago, ends up derailed for whatever reason.
"Harry, the news today suggests at least some of the attention and energy on Jack Smith's team that is investigating the January 6th events is we've got the deputy director of election day activities, this was the title given," said anchor Nicolle Wallace. "These were people coordinating fake electors. What do you think this means, that this is where some of the activity is?"
"Look, I agree even though we may be being overly optimistic to me, but I agree ... it's a bite-sized and manageable case," said Harry Litman. "I took the presence of Brown in particular to be very significant, because he does the hop from the electors themselves, who might have been acting out of their own political motives, into, if not Trump directly, maybe Trump indirectly, that circle, because he's the deputy director of election operations, and he's known most famously for having really been badgering state electors to go this way."
The fact that Brown got immunity for his cooperation, continued Litman, is "a sign of seriousness as well, pointing upwards, as they also gave the electors."
"So, to me, taking this ... very sprawling case and preventing bringing the rest of the case later, is I think both logical — it's a sort of insurance policy against problems in the Mar-a-Lago case, and also in keeping with Smith's overall aggressiveness, and finally in keeping with the few hints which I just end as I began, saying we just get what we get," said Litman, adding, "There may be mountains of evidence that we're not seeing."
Leave a Comment
Related Post