Special Counsel Jack Smith, 54, thinks he’ll have all the facts soon on whether or not to charge 76-year-old President Donald Trump with any crimes related to the Jan. 6 riots and the Aug. 8, 2022 FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago to confiscate classified White House documents. Even if Smith urges Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland to charge Trump with various crimes, there’s no guarantee Garland with follow through, knowing the political fallout of divided government. Nothing would create more revolutionary fervor than charging the former president. Besides charging Trump doesn’t mean, just like his two impeachment trials, he would be convicted. When it comes to the FBI, does Garland really want to open that can of worms to a good defense attorneys to pick apart the Department of Justice? Garland know the FBI’s past abusive treatment of Trump’s 2016 campaign and presidency.
Trump should actually welcome the charges especially on the FBI’s Aug. 8, 2022 raid on Mar-a-Lago. When it comes to the Jan. 6 House Select Committee, their charges are so vague, so generalized, so beyond any criminal statutes that Smith would be laughed out of court. Charged with (a) aid and comfort to the mob, (b) obstructing Congress Jan. 6 joint session, (c) conspiracy to make false statements to the National Archives and (d) conspiracy to defraud the United States, all of which are not criminal acts but a political wish list for the Trump-hating Democrats and Republicans on the House Select Committee. Can you imagine any U.S. prosecutor proving “conspiracy to defraud the United States? Smith knows as a prosecutor he’s dead-in-the water from the get-go, not able to trust so-called evidence provided to the highly partisan and politically biased House Committee.
Lead Jan. 6 House Committee prosecutor 60-year-old Rep. Jamie Rasikin (D-Md.) said recently that Trump has led a “misanthropic life,” showing for all to see the kind of vicious partisanship and bias on the Committee. Who is Raskin to say Trump led a “misanthropic life?” House Jan. 6 Select Committee Co-Chair 56-year-old former Rep. Liz Cheney(R-Wy.) has told the public from Day One, over a year-and-a-half ago, that Trump organized and planned the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. She cites as proof his Jan. 6 speech on Washington, D.C’s Ellipse that Trump incited a mob to attack the Capitol. Trump told his audience to peacefully protest at the Capitol. Cheney knows Trump was acquitted Feb. 13, 2021 in the U.S. Senate of his impeachment charge “incitement of insurrection.” Cheney knows the FBI gave the Committee proof that the Jan. 6 riots were planned by months by various groups.
Cheney and her former Co-Chair Rep. Bernie Thomson (D-Miss.) said Trump “incited an insurrection” without any proof that Trump had any involvement in the Jan. 6 riot. Cheney and Thomson cited Trump’s inaction on Jan. 6 as proof that he conspired with the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers to overthrow the U.S. government. Smith knows that Cheney and Thomson refer to the Jan. 6 Capitol rioters as “Trump supporters,” something also biased, partisan description, knowing the Jan. 6 Committee did not prove that Trump had anything to do with the planning the rabble-rousing on Jan. 6. Whether Trump complained about a “rigged election” or not or had supporters that questioned election officials is not a crime. Even coming up with alternative lists of electors is not a crime because they’re not certified by the Electoral College, so totally invalid, just a PR stunt for Trump backers.
Smith doesn’t have any evidence that Trump defrauded the United States, one of the most meaningless, vague charges imaginable. How did Trump obstruct Congress when the Jan. 6 Committee did not provide Smith with any evidence that Trump planned, orchestrated or supported the criminals that ransacked the Capitol. All Smith can say is that Trump held strong views about the Nov. 8, 2020 election but not evidence that he in any way participated in the criminal acts. When 57-year-old Oathkeeper founder Stewart Rhodes was convicted Nov. 29, 2022 of “seditious conspiracy,” it settled the legal question of who’s responsible for the Jan. 6 riots. How can Smith charge Trump with aid-and-abetting the mob, when he wasn’t involved with the criminal any criminal activity Jan. 6? When you look at all the cherry picked evidence, Smith can’t rely on anything supplied by the Jan. 6 House Committee.
Smith has his work cut out for him tying to piece together a criminal case against Trump with all the biased and partisan evidence compiled by the Jan. 6 House Committee. Democrats wasted millions, spending a year-and-a-half continuing Trump’s impeachment trial of “incitement of insurrection.” When does delivering a speech prove that Trump told right wing groups to ransack the Capitol Jan. 6? If you listen to Cheney and Thomson, the Jan. 6 criminals were all “Trump supporters,” when, in fact, they were part of the lunatic fringe that though they could take the law into their own hands. Vigilante justice doesn’t pay off in a nation based on the Constitution and rule of law. No matter what the pressure on Smith faces from Democrats and the press, he must resist the anti-Trump mob no matter how convinced Trump was responsible for Jan. 6. Smith can only look at the facts.
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
