Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inbox
Receive our free Inside Washington email
Sign up for our complimentary Inside Washington newsletter.
Jack Smith, the seasoned prosecutor who has revealed two groundbreaking federal charges against former US president Donald Trump for war crimes, is familiar with conducting high-profile investigations of prominent individuals.
From 2010 to 2015, the US Department of Justice veteran was responsible for prosecuting cases of corruption against several US politicians as the leader of the department’s public integrity section.
One instance involved accusations of bribery against former Virginia governor Robert McDonnell, a Republican who was initially convicted but had the case overturned by the US Supreme Court.
Additionally, he successfully prosecuted former Republican Congressman Rick Renzi from Arizona, resulting in a three-year prison sentence that was later pardoned by President Trump.
Mr. Smith, who graduated from Harvard Law School, also held positions as a prosecutor in the US Attorney’s offices for the Middle District of Tennessee and the Eastern District of New York.
Before being chosen by US attorney general Merrick Garland, Mr. Smith resided in The Hague, Netherlands, where he held the position of “specialist prosecutor” and was responsible for leading investigations into war crimes in Kosovo since 2018.
From 2008 to 2010, he worked as a coordinator for the prosecutor’s office at the International Criminal Court and was involved in investigations of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed by foreign government officials and militia members.
In November of last year, Mr Smith came back to the United States after being designated as a special advisor by Mr Garland.
The initial task was to determine whether any individual or organization broke the law while attempting to disrupt the legitimate transfer of power after the 2020 presidential election or during the certification of the electoral college vote on January 6, 2021.
The second charge against Mr. Trump involved 37 federal charges and resulted in his indictment and arraignment. It pertained to potential violations of U.S. laws regarding the unlawful retention of national defense information and obstruction of justice.
Donald Trump
This was the first instance in American history where a former president, especially one who is running for the upcoming presidential election, was met with criminal accusations.
and pleaded not guilty.
On June 13, 2023, Mr. Trump was taken into custody and appeared in a federal court in Miami to face the charges. He entered a plea of not guilty. His longtime associate, Walt Nauta, was also accused and entered a plea of not guilty.
During the arraignment proceedings, multiple reporters observed Mr. Smith intently staring at the former president in the courtroom.
On July 27th, Mr. Smith added new allegations against Mr. Trump in the ongoing case regarding claims that he attempted to erase security footage from Mar-a-Lago in order to prevent it from being given to investigators looking into his handling of confidential documents.
Prosecutors allege that Mr. Nauta and another defendant, Carlos De Oliveira, the property manager of Mar-a-Lago, worked together to conceal the video footage. Both Mr. Nauta and Mr. De Oliveira were also implicated in the case.
President Trump has been charged with his 32nd offense of retaining confidential national defense information. This new charge is related to a classified document that is described as a top-secret presentation discussing military activity in a foreign nation. The document is believed to contain a plan of attack on Iran, which was previously discussed by Mr. Trump in a meeting with biographers and staff members at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.
It is anticipated that Mr. Trump will face a trial in Florida on May 20, 2024.
Aside from the matter of the classified documents, Mr. Smith also looked into Mr. Trump’s attempts to retain his presidency after losing the 2020 election. This included investigating any potential involvement he may have had in inciting the insurrection on January 6th, 2021, for which he was impeached but ultimately not convicted in the US Senate trial.
At the end of his speech, Donald Trump made a gesture during a rally to challenge the validation of the 2020 election results on the day of the violent uprising.
On July 18th, the ex-president announced that he had been informed via letter that he was the subject of a federal grand jury investigation.
On August 1st, a third charge was filed against the former president.
A jury in Washington DC has indicted Mr Trump on four charges, including conspiracy to commit fraud against the United States, conspiracy to interfere with an official process, conspiracy against individual rights, and obstruction of, and attempted obstruction of, an official process.
On August 3rd, Mr. Trump turned himself in to DC authorities in order to be arrested prior to his arraignment. In a later month, the federal judge presiding over the case scheduled a trial for March 4th, 2024.
In the legal setting, Mr Trump and his adversary Mr Smith were once again in close proximity – locking eyes as the former leader declared his innocence to all accusations.
During November 2020, Jack Smith was the presiding judge at a hearing for war crimes at The Hague.
Mr. Smith has been thrust into the public eye as he takes legal action against one of the world’s most renowned individuals.
Can his previous experience adequately prepare him for the intense national scrutiny he will now face, including the notorious social media attacks from Mr. Trump?
After being indicted by the federal government in June, Mr. Trump retaliated against Mr. Smith by calling him a “Trump hater” and a “deranged psycho” who should not be involved in any legal proceedings involving justice, except to view Biden as a criminal – which Mr. Trump believes he is.
Afterwards, Mr. Smith was targeted by Mr. Trump’s allies and followers, such as Kimberly Guilfoyle, Matt Gaetz, and Mark Levin.
“Special Counsel Jack Smith is atrocious,” the MAGA War Room tweeted on 13 June – the day of Mr Trump’s arrest and arraignment.
On June 12th, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, a member of the far-right political party in Georgia, proposed a budget amendment to the House of Representatives that would cut funding for Jack Smith’s Special Counsel, his office, and the ongoing investigation.
She stated that this is a government’s attempt to attack the main political opponent and frontrunner for presidency.
Mr. Smith has been continuously targeted by Mr. Trump himself following the initial federal indictment.
On June 13th, at Bedminster, the ex-president criticized the special prosecutor during his speech following his arraignment.
“He appears to have a thuggish appearance,” he commented about Mr. Smith.
“He harbors an intense and unbridled dislike for Trump, just like his wife who coincidentally happens to be the producer of the flattering Michelle Obama piece, ‘Becoming’, released in 2020.” (Mr. Smith’s spouse, Katy Chevigny, is a documentarian who worked on the production of the film.)
Mr. Smith has consistently been unwavering in his reply.
On June 9th, when the charges were revealed, he displayed a resistant attitude – an attitude he seemed to maintain in his behavior during court proceedings.
He informed journalists that the Department of Justice strongly believes in upholding the rule of law and that our country’s dedication to this principle serves as a model for the rest of the world.
“All individuals in this country are subject to the same set of laws.”
Following a second federal indictment against Mr. Trump, his campaign issued a statement denouncing the charges as “disgraceful” and an act of “political targeting”.
The statement from President Trump’s campaign stated that the current persecutions towards him and his supporters are similar to those seen in Nazi Germany, the former Soviet Union, and other authoritarian governments. The statement also emphasized that President Trump has always adhered to the law and the Constitution, receiving guidance from numerous experienced lawyers.
After Mr Trump’s explosive statements during his fraud trial in New York, a court order was issued to prevent him from speaking publicly. In light of this, Mr Smith asked for measures to protect the jurors and potential jurors before the former president’s trial for election tampering.
In October, the judge overseeing the case brought by New York’s attorney general Letitia James against Mr. Trump’s business empire cautioned him that he could face severe penalties if he continues to make disparaging remarks about court members. He had recently made false accusations against Judge Arthur Engoron’s chief clerk on his Truth Social account.
On 10 October, Mr Smith submitted a report to US district judge Tanya Chutkan, stating that there are valid justifications for the court to implement restrictions on juror information. One of the primary reasons is the defendant’s ongoing use of social media as a tool for intimidation during court proceedings.
The document states that the defendant recently intensified their actions and publicly criticized the clerk employed by Judge Engoron in the New York Supreme Court.
“Mr. Smith cautioned that there is reason for concern regarding the defendant’s use of social media to publicly criticize a court staffer, especially in light of their apparent review of opposition research. This raises concerns about the potential use of social media research on potential jurors in this case.”
In October, Mr. Smith also condemned Mr. Trump’s attempt to delay his trial for classified documents until after the 2024 election.
According to Mr. Smith, Mr. Trump is not only requesting a seven-month extension for the trial, but the court had already denied a delay less than three months prior.
The trial for the classified documents is scheduled to commence in May 2024.
Mr. Smith stated that the defendants have not presented a valid reason to delay the trial, which is still seven months away.
“They have been fully briefed on the accusations and the prosecution’s argument through a thorough superseding indictment and extensive, well-organized discovery materials that are both unclassified and classified.”
In December, the United States Supreme Court accepted a case to review Mr. Trump’s plea for presidential immunity. He argues that he should be shielded from prosecution for his actions as commander-in-chief. This prompted Mr. Smith to make a request for an expedited process, which the justices agreed to.
The team of Mr. Smith requested that they determine if a previous president is completely protected from being prosecuted by the federal government for any crimes committed during their time in office, or if they are shielded by the Constitution from federal prosecution if they have been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin.
In the document, they stated that the United States acknowledges the exceptional nature of this request. They also noted that this is a highly unusual situation.
After Mr. Trump criticized his intervention as “authoritarian,” Mr. Smith responded by stating that the Republican’s statement “endangers the possibility of presidents committing crimes in order to stay in office,” emphasizing the importance of a clear ruling.
New information has come to light that Mr. Smith’s family was subjected to a bothersome “swatting” incident at their home in Maryland on Christmas Day. It is suspected that the false accusation made to law enforcement was done by a member of the public, possibly a supporter of Trump, in an attempt to have authorities come to the Smith’s home.
This report was contributed to by Gustaf Kilander, Ariana Baio, Kelly Rissman, and Alex Woodward.
Source: independent.co.uk
