Free Republic

Donald Trump has called for Special Counsel Jack Smith to be arrested after the prosecutor's team said some evidence in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case are no longer in their "original, intact" form. In a post on Truth Social, the former president demanded "ARREST DERANGED JACK SMITH. HE IS A CRIMINAL!" after federal prosecutors wrote in court filings that there are some boxes where the "order of items within that box is not the same" as they appear in digital scans of materials in the wake of the FBI retrieving them from Trump's Florida resort in August 2022. Smith's office...

Newly unsealed documents in Jack Smith’s classified documents case against Trump further prove Biden’s DOJ set up Trump. The unsealed motion reveals Jack Smith’s top prosecutor, Jay Bratt, met with a top Biden aide in September 2021 – before any classified documents were discovered at Mar-a-Lago. Bratt met with an aide to Biden’s White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain in September 2021. Per Julie Kelly: Jay Bratt–who led investigation into classified docs then moved to Jack Smith’s team after he was appointed–met with aide to WH chief of staff Ron Klain in Sept. 2021

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 @julie_kelly2 NEW: Per Judge Cannon's authorization, Trump just filed unsealed version of motion to dismiss on selective/vindictive prosecution. Notes others caught with similar documents were never prosecuted incl Biden, Pence, both Clintons and Jim Comey.

Former President Donald Trump shared a positive note following last week’s U.S. Supreme Court hearing, in which justices heard arguments from his legal team about “presidential immunity” stemming from charges brought against him by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Trump reacted to the “monumental” hearing Thursday, saying he thinks it was “made clear” that a president “has to have immunity.”

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 @julie_kelly2 More proof of collusion between NARA and Biden White House. The day before Jack Smith announced the indictment against Trump in classified docs case, NARA general counsel was at the Biden White House and met with Biden's special counsel Richard Sauber:

President Trump shared last week that he believes the FBI stole his will. The FBI also stole 1,800 other items that were not documents that belonged to President Trump. This was not lawful or necessary. It is also widely known at this point that Joe Biden who ordered the FBI access to Trump’s documents at Mar-a-Lago and President Trump’s personal belongings. On pages 2-3 of the ruling Judge Cannon revealed that it was JOE BIDEN who ordered the FBI access to the Mar-a-Lago documents and President Trump’s personal belongings. PICTURES AT LINK.............. This was despite the Biden regime insisting they...

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has asked former President Donald Trump’s lawyers about whether they challenged special counsel Jack Smith’s authority to bring charges against the president.On April 25, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case about President Trump being immune from prosecution for official acts carried out during his presidency. During the hearing, Justice Thomas asked John Sauer, the attorney who represented Trump in court, “Did you, in this litigation, challenge the appointment of special counsel?” Mr. Smith was appointed to the case by Attorney General Merrick Garland.Mr. Sauer said that Trump attorneys have not...

Judge Aileen Cannon unsealed an unredacted version of the FBI’s affidavit used to obtain a Mar-a-Lago search warrant. In August 2022 the Biden Justice Department released a highly redacted Trump raid affidavit. Media organizations asked to unseal the affidavit in support of the search warrant. Only a redacted version was previously unsealed. Last year Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart approved new aspects of the Trump Mar-a-Lago search warrant to be unsealed, however “the government agreed that a redacted version of the Response could be unsealed without compromising legitimate governmental interests,” Bruce Reinhart wrote in his order on motion to unseal. The...

A new documentary being released by the organization behind the American Greatness website, next week on April 17, is exposing the “four corrupt, political motivated” prosecutors now pursuing cases against President Donald Trump. The narrator of “Chasing Trump” explains, “They say they’re upholding the law. But a close examination reveals politics of the very worst kind meant to influence the 2024 election.” He cites, “Four corrupt, politically motivated prosecutors. One target: Donald Trump.” The trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPAMRVt46KA “Can there be any doubt there’s a sentiment of ‘This is get Trump?'” The video documentary is coming just as a trial is starting...

SCOTUS Justices wrestled with how to define a president’s ‘official’ versus ‘private’ acts. A decision may delay President Trump’s trial, which would hand him a win. The Supreme Court seemed skeptical on April 25 of former President Donald Trump’s claim that he should receive absolute criminal immunity, but it appeared to be open to allowing some level of immunity for presidents. Conservative justices seemed poised to remand the case back to the district court in Washington with instructions on what constitutes official and private acts for further fact-finding proceedings. This would further delay President Trump’s trial in Washington and possibly...

Judge Aileen Cannon on Wednesday unsealed more records related to Jack Smith’s classified documents case against Trump. The newly unsealed documents detail allegations that Jack Smith’s prosecutor Jay Bratt threatened Stanley Woodward, an attorney for Trump’s valet driver Walt Nauta. Jay Bratt tried to bribe Stanley Woodward and threatened him with a sinking judicial nomination if he didn’t get Walt Nauta to testify against Trump. “Upon Mr. Woodward’s arrival at Main Justice, he was led to a conference room where Mr. Bratt awaited with what appeared to be a folder containing information about Mr. Woodward. Mr. Bratt thereupon told Mr....

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito suggested Thursday during oral arguments regarding presidential immunity that criminalizing individuals just because they question government-run elections would destabilize true democracy. Special counsel Jack Smith indicted former President Donald Trump for questioning the administration of the 2020 election. The high court is now hearing challenges as to whether presidents have immunity from criminal prosecutions for actions taken while in office that fall within the scope of their presidential duties. “Let me end with just a question about, what is required for the functioning of a stable democratic society, which is something that we all want?”...

If you have followed law and politics for any length of time, you have probably heard of “speaking indictments.” That’s where the prosecution will write an indictment or court motion with very granular -yet perhaps not pertinent- details of a case against a suspect that highlights a much bigger picture than a singular perspective against the individual defendant. The intent is to make the public aware of the details within a case by making them part of the court record. In the Special Counsel Jack Smith constructed Lawfare case against Donald Trump, what is generally called “the documents case”, involving...

Thursday’s argument in Trump v. United States was a disaster for Special Counsel Jack Smith, and for anyone who believes that the president of the United States should be subject to prosecution if they commit a crime.

Newly unredacted documents in the Mar-a-Lago raid case indicate that Jack Smith was after Obama and North Korea-related documents. After the raid the DOJ was pleased with their findings and wrote, “I think we are in good shape.” President Trump said two years after he met Obama before his 2017 Inauguration that Obama was on the brink of starting a war with North Korea. Trump claimed that Obama was “close to starting a big war” with North Korea. Obama must not have liked this. The corrupt and criminal Obama/Biden gang was after documents related to North Korea years later when...

On the left: What DOJ/Jack Smith wanted to conceal. On the right: Now we know why. More proof of collaboration btw Biden White House and NARA to concoct a case. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Outrageous lies by Joe Biden, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and DOJ/Jack Smith about "independence" from investigations into Trump. The Biden White House and DOJ wew intimately involved in developing a criminal case against Trump for records mismanagement--it appears the first go-around related to alleged "destruction" of government papers. Contrary to public and legal assertions, NARA was working with DOJ/White House to craft a criminal referral by Sept. 2021--FIVE MONTHS...

Special counsel Jack Smith on Monday implored the judge in charge of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago documents case not to force the government into complying with defense discovery motions. In January, attorneys for the 45th president accused Smith and his office of myriad discovery violations in a rambling defense filing that also asserted that the genesis of the federal Florida case could be traced to “politically motivated operatives” within President Joe Biden’s administration who launched a “crusade” against their client to hamstring his chances in the 2024 presidential election. In the government’s response in opposition, Smith aims to methodically...

Judge Aileen Cannon on Monday ordered key evidence in Jack Smith’s classified documents case to be unredacted. The newly unredacted documents revealed Biden’s White House had direct ties to the Mar-a-Lago raid. The Biden Regime was also directly tied to Jack Smith’s investigation despite claims to the contrary from US Attorney General Merrick Garland. Before with redactions: Jack Smith wanted to hide the fact that the National Archives had several conversations with the Biden White House.

The solicitor general’s argument painted a picture of the Biden administration enlarging or contracting statutory language to serve political purposes.The Supreme Court heard oral argument Tuesday in a criminal appeal challenging the Biden administration’s use of a catch-all provision in a federal statute focused on the destruction of evidence to charge hundreds of J6 defendants with a 20-year felony. Over the course of the hour-long argument, the government made clear its view that the federal statute at issue, 18 U.S.C. 1512(c)(2), had an expansive reach — other than when Antifa burns a courthouse, a member of Congress pulls a fire...

The US Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in Fischer v. United States and at issue is statute 18 USC §1512(c)(2): Whoever corruptly— (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on Fischer v United...